log problem: solve 2lnx + 5ln2 = lnx - ln4

G

Guest

Guest
Solve the following equation for the unknown variable. Justify each step of the solution with a written explanation. Round to the nearest thousandth:
2lnx+5ln2=lnx-ln4
 
You need to use log rules:

. . . . .log<sub>b</sub>(a<sup>n</sup>) = nlog<sub>b</sub>(a)

. . . . .log<sub>b</sub>(ac) = log<sub>b</sub>(a) + log<sub>b</sub>(c)

. . . . .log<sub>b</sub>(a/c) = log<sub>b</sub>(a) - log<sub>b</sub>(c)

First, put the multipliers on the left-hand side inside their respective log terms. Then combine the log terms on the left- and right-hand sides, to get "ln(something) = ln(something else)".

Then you can equate the "something" with the "something else", and solve the resulting quadratic equation.

If you get stuck, please reply showing how far you have gotten. Thank you.

Eliz.
 
\(\displaystyle \L
\begin{array}{rcl}
2\ln (x) + 5\ln (2) & = & \ln (x) - \ln (4) \\
\ln (x) & = & - \ln (32) - \ln (4) \\
\ln (x) & = & - \ln (8) \\
\end{array}\)
 
I could be wrong, but:

. . . . .-ln(32) - ln(4) = -[ln(32) + ln(4)] = -[ln(128)]

...not -ln(8).

Eliz.
 
stapel said:
I could be wrong, but:

. . . . .-ln(32) - ln(4) = -[ln(32) + ln(4)] = -[ln(128)]
...not -ln(8).Eliz.
No you are correct! Sometimes I just jump!
This time I forgot the minus sign.
Thanks for checking!
 
Top